First published
in News
Last updated
by Damian Fantato, Council Reporter, also covering Oxford city centre. Call me on 01865 425429

THE future of Oxford’s train station is being unveiled today and has been hailed as a big step towards the city getting the integrated transport hub it needs.

Details of the £75m scheme have been released by Oxford City Council and reveal the new station will tower over Botley Road bridge, which is being widened for the development.

Areas have been earmarked for new flats and apartments while shops, office space and a hotel could be included in the final project.

A transport terminal will be built across from the station between Botley Road and Becket Street – where the long-stay car-park is currently.

It will include a new bus station, multi-storey car-park and cycle racks.

The station will be bulldozed to make way for a new one which will run parallel to Botley Road, where the station’s current cycle racks are, and face on to Frideswide Square. Part of Botley Road will be lowered for the new bridge.

Land to the north of the new station, which will stretch from where the current short-stay car-park is, could be used for office space, a hotel or an expansion of the Said Business School, including student accommodation.

In September the county council will begin its £5.5m redevelopment of Frideswide Square, which will see a boulevard created with three roundabouts and increased public space, with work due to be completed by December 2015.

Oxford City Council leader Bob Price, said the new station building would be around 80 per cent bigger than the current one and would include an array of shops.

He also said that the creation of a bus station on the site creates the potential to move the city’s bus services to London and its airports there from Gloucester Green.

Mr Price said: “This is a vision for the development of a landmark gateway into the city.”

But he said he has concerns about the timescale of the development.

The number of passengers using Oxford station has been increasing every year, with 6.3 million passing through it in 2012/13 compared to 4.7 million in 2007/08.

Oxford Civic Society has long campaigned for a transport interchange to be included at the station, suggesting that the entire station be moved further south to Oxpens to accommodate it.

The civic society’s chairman Peter Thompson said: “We have significant reservations about whether there is the width available to integrate a proper transport hub in the manner that is done absolutely routinely in cities across Europe, that’s why we have been asking for the option to move the station further south to be considered.”

Network Rail has said that moving the station to Oxpens would bring no benefits and that it would be too expensive.

An architectural competition will now take place to determine the design of the station building and a public consultation will be held at the Westgate Centre exhibition suite on August 1-2.

Work on the development could start in 2017 and be finished by 2019.

Main features

A new station building with more shops

A transport interchange – including bus station and multi-storey car park

A third platform and new rail tracks

Improvements to the Botley Road rail bridge

New commercial development which could be used for a hotel, offices, retail space or for an expansion to the Said Business School

Do you want alerts delivered straight to your phone via our WhatsApp service? Text NEWS, SPORT and JAYDEN depending on what services you want, and your full name to 07767 417704. Save our number into your phone as Oxford Mail WhatsApp and ensure you have WhatsApp installed.

Comments (24)

'Widening the Botley Road bridge' could mean 'widening west-east' to accommodate extra train tracks which is clearly going to be necessary, but will it mean widening north-south for a wider road, to overcome the current bottleneck?

'Widening the Botley Road bridge' could mean 'widening west-east' to accommodate extra train tracks which is clearly going to be necessary, but will it mean widening north-south for a wider road, to overcome the current bottleneck?Dick Wolff

heaven help us if the County have a hand in this, whatever they attempt in the way of traffic management ends in a total **** up causing misery to ALL commuters (cyclists motorists and bus users)

heaven help us if the County have a hand in this, whatever they attempt in the way of traffic management ends in a total **** up causing misery to ALL commuters (cyclists motorists and bus users)norton manor

(Trams)It's a secular day and it will be even better tomorrow.
(Trams)It's the first day of the intergrated transport hub,
(Trams)Let us celebrate this monumental progress.
(Trams)We have reduced emmisions by 75%

to quote the super-furry animals
(Trams)It's a secular day and it will be even better tomorrow.
(Trams)It's the first day of the intergrated transport hub,
(Trams)Let us celebrate this monumental progress.
(Trams)We have reduced emmisions by 75%photon

Dick Wolff wrote:
'Widening the Botley Road bridge' could mean 'widening west-east' to accommodate extra train tracks which is clearly going to be necessary, but will it mean widening north-south for a wider road, to overcome the current bottleneck?

In a word, yes.

[quote][p][bold]Dick Wolff[/bold] wrote:
'Widening the Botley Road bridge' could mean 'widening west-east' to accommodate extra train tracks which is clearly going to be necessary, but will it mean widening north-south for a wider road, to overcome the current bottleneck?[/p][/quote]In a word, yes.King Joke

So, "Oxfordshire County Council leader Ian Hudspeth said: “The masterplan is a big step towards the city getting the station it deserves as a vital transport interchange in Oxfordshire.”
All very well except for the majority of the population who are unable to afford to use the Railway.

So, "Oxfordshire County Council leader Ian Hudspeth said: “The masterplan is a big step towards the city getting the station it deserves as a vital transport interchange in Oxfordshire.”
All very well except for the majority of the population who are unable to afford to use the Railway.BML

YEA YEA YEA, for the last ten years we have been getting a new Westgate Shopping Centre, and look what happened there. Believe it when you see it. And with the new Oxford Parkway Station opening next year, do we need a new station in the centre?

YEA YEA YEA, for the last ten years we have been getting a new Westgate Shopping Centre, and look what happened there. Believe it when you see it. And with the new Oxford Parkway Station opening next year, do we need a new station in the centre?The New Private Eye

BML wrote:
So, &quot;Oxfordshire County Council leader Ian Hudspeth said: “The masterplan is a big step towards the city getting the station it deserves as a vital transport interchange in Oxfordshire.”
All very well except for the majority of the population who are unable to afford to use the Railway.

The railways are bursting at the seams and 1.5 bn journeys are being made a year, so clearly more and more of us CAN afford to use the railway.

THere are some silly expensive fares out there, and also som excellent ones. Me and the Mrs are going to Cornwall next month for £122 return, for both of us, on fully-flexible open tickets. It isn't much more than the diesel would be to drive, maybe even less, and a b|oody sight easier than fighting through holiday traffic.

[quote][p][bold]BML[/bold] wrote:
So, "Oxfordshire County Council leader Ian Hudspeth said: “The masterplan is a big step towards the city getting the station it deserves as a vital transport interchange in Oxfordshire.”
All very well except for the majority of the population who are unable to afford to use the Railway.[/p][/quote]The railways are bursting at the seams and 1.5 bn journeys are being made a year, so clearly more and more of us CAN afford to use the railway.
THere are some silly expensive fares out there, and also som excellent ones. Me and the Mrs are going to Cornwall next month for £122 return, for both of us, on fully-flexible open tickets. It isn't much more than the diesel would be to drive, maybe even less, and a b|oody sight easier than fighting through holiday traffic.King Joke

You can be quite sure that the notorious Oxford(shire) faction of the CPRE will have their upturned noses in the paper soon enough.

There will be:-

"Fear" about the view from the graveyard.
"Concern" about the prospect of homes being built for rail commuters.
"Anguish & horror" at the installation of industrial wiring alongside Port Meadow.

Don't underestimate the Mill Street NIMBYs either - they are almost as powerful as the faction...

[quote][p][bold]yabbadabbadoo256[/bold] wrote:
Quick someone mobilise the Oxfordshire CPRE!![/p][/quote]You can be quite sure that the notorious Oxford(shire) faction of the CPRE will have their upturned noses in the paper soon enough.
There will be:-
"Fear" about the view from the graveyard.
"Concern" about the prospect of homes being built for rail commuters.
"Anguish & horror" at the installation of industrial wiring alongside Port Meadow.
Don't underestimate the Mill Street NIMBYs either - they are almost as powerful as the faction...Andrew:Oxford

Four through platforms.
Two Marylebone/EW Terminus Platforms
One Reading/Paddington Terminus Platform

So Seven altogether.

[quote][p][bold]phil-g-[/bold] wrote:
"A third platform will also be included "
The station already has three platforms...
Will there now be four?[/p][/quote]Third terminating platform...
Four through platforms.
Two Marylebone/EW Terminus Platforms
One Reading/Paddington Terminus Platform
So Seven altogether.Andrew:Oxford

Four through platforms.
Two Marylebone/EW Terminus Platforms
One Reading/Paddington Terminus Platform

So Seven altogether.

You must know something we dont Andrew. The video doesnt show that, nor does the OCC masterpan document - that appears to show just one north facing bay alongside 4 through paltforms.

The "bus station" is far too small to replace Gloucester Green.

How can all that be done for £75m, including relocating the Youth Hostel?

[quote][p][bold]Andrew:Oxford[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]phil-g-[/bold] wrote:
"A third platform will also be included "
The station already has three platforms...
Will there now be four?[/p][/quote]Third terminating platform...
Four through platforms.
Two Marylebone/EW Terminus Platforms
One Reading/Paddington Terminus Platform
So Seven altogether.[/p][/quote]You must know something we dont Andrew. The video doesnt show that, nor does the OCC masterpan document - that appears to show just one north facing bay alongside 4 through paltforms.
The "bus station" is far too small to replace Gloucester Green.
How can all that be done for £75m, including relocating the Youth Hostel?Patrick, Devon

I agree Patrick - the bus station shown will just about handle the current terminating services and could not possibly replace GG. You'd have to keep GG open, and hopefully tart it up a bit.

There is no need to move the long-distance coach services out of the city centre anyway, there is little need for interchange with rail services as they largely duplicate them. It's more important for them to interchange with local bus services, which they could not do as well at the station; the city centre offers many more interchange opportunities.

I agree Patrick - the bus station shown will just about handle the current terminating services and could not possibly replace GG. You'd have to keep GG open, and hopefully tart it up a bit.
There is no need to move the long-distance coach services out of the city centre anyway, there is little need for interchange with rail services as they largely duplicate them. It's more important for them to interchange with local bus services, which they could not do as well at the station; the city centre offers many more interchange opportunities.King Joke

King Joke wrote:
I agree Patrick - the bus station shown will just about handle the current terminating services and could not possibly replace GG. You'd have to keep GG open, and hopefully tart it up a bit.

There is no need to move the long-distance coach services out of the city centre anyway, there is little need for interchange with rail services as they largely duplicate them. It's more important for them to interchange with local bus services, which they could not do as well at the station; the city centre offers many more interchange opportunities.

No KJ, the Airport and London buses should go from the new station along Botley Road and the ring road to Thornhill to pick up passengers from the North and East. This would ease the pollution and congestion in St Aldates, The High and St Clems, and also save the said roads and London Road from the damage being caused by the said buses. Only a few years ago we put up with massive congestion from Carfax To The Plain when the road was rebuilt, but Mr Hudspeth said it would be worth it because the road would last 25 years. But as you now see the road is already ruined because of the buses. Can us taxpayers ask for our money back from Souter, and Go-Ahead?

[quote][p][bold]King Joke[/bold] wrote:
I agree Patrick - the bus station shown will just about handle the current terminating services and could not possibly replace GG. You'd have to keep GG open, and hopefully tart it up a bit.
There is no need to move the long-distance coach services out of the city centre anyway, there is little need for interchange with rail services as they largely duplicate them. It's more important for them to interchange with local bus services, which they could not do as well at the station; the city centre offers many more interchange opportunities.[/p][/quote]No KJ, the Airport and London buses should go from the new station along Botley Road and the ring road to Thornhill to pick up passengers from the North and East. This would ease the pollution and congestion in St Aldates, The High and St Clems, and also save the said roads and London Road from the damage being caused by the said buses. Only a few years ago we put up with massive congestion from Carfax To The Plain when the road was rebuilt, but Mr Hudspeth said it would be worth it because the road would last 25 years. But as you now see the road is already ruined because of the buses. Can us taxpayers ask for our money back from Souter, and Go-Ahead?The New Private Eye

'Us taxpayers' are getting a superb high-quality high-frequency coach service with no need for taxpayer support, so the least the County can do is provide an up-to-date road surface for it to operate on.

The coaches have very clean modern engines so hardly produce any pollution, and form a very small part of the traffic on St Aldates so can hardly be blamed for congestion. At any rate St Aldates flows well until 1830; a hundred buses an hour is a phenomenal level of service for a small city, but is not much in traffic terms.

Your plan to kick the coaches out of anywhere they would be useful, and subject them to a huge detour, would be disastrous. The city's local bus network does not, and neither should, hub around Thornhill. It hubs around the city centre and the national coach network should do so to in order to connect with it. I presume you either live near Thornhill or don't use the coach very much.

'Us taxpayers' are getting a superb high-quality high-frequency coach service with no need for taxpayer support, so the least the County can do is provide an up-to-date road surface for it to operate on.
The coaches have very clean modern engines so hardly produce any pollution, and form a very small part of the traffic on St Aldates so can hardly be blamed for congestion. At any rate St Aldates flows well until 1830; a hundred buses an hour is a phenomenal level of service for a small city, but is not much in traffic terms.
Your plan to kick the coaches out of anywhere they would be useful, and subject them to a huge detour, would be disastrous. The city's local bus network does not, and neither should, hub around Thornhill. It hubs around the city centre and the national coach network should do so to in order to connect with it. I presume you either live near Thornhill or don't use the coach very much.King Joke

King Joke wrote:
'Us taxpayers' are getting a superb high-quality high-frequency coach service with no need for taxpayer support, so the least the County can do is provide an up-to-date road surface for it to operate on.

The coaches have very clean modern engines so hardly produce any pollution, and form a very small part of the traffic on St Aldates so can hardly be blamed for congestion. At any rate St Aldates flows well until 1830; a hundred buses an hour is a phenomenal level of service for a small city, but is not much in traffic terms.

Your plan to kick the coaches out of anywhere they would be useful, and subject them to a huge detour, would be disastrous. The city's local bus network does not, and neither should, hub around Thornhill. It hubs around the city centre and the national coach network should do so to in order to connect with it. I presume you either live near Thornhill or don't use the coach very much.

I would prefer that our millions that was spent on building new roads, and the millions lost to Businesses during the couple of years that it took to rebuild The High and London Road not to have been in vain. The Journey from the Rail Station to Thornhill during peak times will not be a lot different, and during off peak far quicker as most of it will be at 70mph. It will make Carfax and The High a more pleasant place for cyclists and pedestrians without the massive coaches thundering past, and although too late to save the road surface, will save it from further damage. But I would like somebody in power to ask Mr Hudspeth about the 25 year guarantee that he boasted about on Mr Boydens breakfast show a few years back, and what is being done about it.

[quote][p][bold]King Joke[/bold] wrote:
'Us taxpayers' are getting a superb high-quality high-frequency coach service with no need for taxpayer support, so the least the County can do is provide an up-to-date road surface for it to operate on.
The coaches have very clean modern engines so hardly produce any pollution, and form a very small part of the traffic on St Aldates so can hardly be blamed for congestion. At any rate St Aldates flows well until 1830; a hundred buses an hour is a phenomenal level of service for a small city, but is not much in traffic terms.
Your plan to kick the coaches out of anywhere they would be useful, and subject them to a huge detour, would be disastrous. The city's local bus network does not, and neither should, hub around Thornhill. It hubs around the city centre and the national coach network should do so to in order to connect with it. I presume you either live near Thornhill or don't use the coach very much.[/p][/quote]I would prefer that our millions that was spent on building new roads, and the millions lost to Businesses during the couple of years that it took to rebuild The High and London Road not to have been in vain. The Journey from the Rail Station to Thornhill during peak times will not be a lot different, and during off peak far quicker as most of it will be at 70mph. It will make Carfax and The High a more pleasant place for cyclists and pedestrians without the massive coaches thundering past, and although too late to save the road surface, will save it from further damage. But I would like somebody in power to ask Mr Hudspeth about the 25 year guarantee that he boasted about on Mr Boydens breakfast show a few years back, and what is being done about it.The New Private Eye

One of the advantages of trams is that very large numbers of passengers can be transported through a narrow corridoor without wearing out the road surfaces. Tram track will last for decades with minimal maintenance.

Where is the provision for tram-trains to access the road network in the masterplan? Or for a rapid transit route alongside the rail line?

One of the advantages of trams is that very large numbers of passengers can be transported through a narrow corridoor without wearing out the road surfaces. Tram track will last for decades with minimal maintenance.
Where is the provision for tram-trains to access the road network in the masterplan? Or for a rapid transit route alongside the rail line?Patrick, Devon

Private Eye, even if you could magic away all the traffic which ensures speeds on the ring road in the peak are a fraction of the 70 mph you laughably envisage, you forget that the coach services are only viable because they offer calling points close to residential and commercial areas in the centre and east of the city. Take away those and the coach would soon wither away to the hourly services that less enlightened provincial towns 'enjoy'.

I wonder how many businesses would be so delighted to lose such a superb asset to the city - fast links from Heathrow, Gatwick and central London to within a short walk from their premises, on a very frequent basis. THe coaches run because people and businesses use them - not to annoy you.

Private Eye, even if you could magic away all the traffic which ensures speeds on the ring road in the peak are a fraction of the 70 mph you laughably envisage, you forget that the coach services are only viable because they offer calling points close to residential and commercial areas in the centre and east of the city. Take away those and the coach would soon wither away to the hourly [or worse] services that less enlightened provincial towns 'enjoy'.
I wonder how many businesses would be so delighted to lose such a superb asset to the city - fast links from Heathrow, Gatwick and central London to within a short walk from their premises, on a very frequent basis. THe coaches run because people and businesses use them - not to annoy you.King Joke

King Joke wrote:
Private Eye, even if you could magic away all the traffic which ensures speeds on the ring road in the peak are a fraction of the 70 mph you laughably envisage, you forget that the coach services are only viable because they offer calling points close to residential and commercial areas in the centre and east of the city. Take away those and the coach would soon wither away to the hourly services that less enlightened provincial towns 'enjoy'.

I wonder how many businesses would be so delighted to lose such a superb asset to the city - fast links from Heathrow, Gatwick and central London to within a short walk from their premises, on a very frequent basis. THe coaches run because people and businesses use them - not to annoy you.

I do not understand your point, the train station is a four minute walk from the current terminus, that will not put people off (in fact when GG was closed and relocated to Oxpens coach park a few years ago it had no effect on services) And Thornhill P&R is ideal for people travelling to East, North and South Oxford, with local bus services linking to various parts of Oxford, and people can order a Taxi from the coach to pick them up if they so wish. The benefit to the City Centre would be massive with over 100 of the heaviest vehicles removed. And why would the coach soon wither away? are people going to start paying £100+ to get to the airport in a taxi, or will they say "sod it I'm going on holiday to Bognor instead of Barbados because the coach does not run past my house? Don't forget all of the doom death and disaster that would happen when the buses were thrown out of Cornmarket, with people like you saying it is too far to walk across town to get a connecting bus, well people have adapted to that, and they would to a new people friendly coach service. The Airport and London Coaches are now far too big and frequent to be allowed to continue through the city centre, even you must be able to see that, or do you still pine for the days of buses clogging up Cornmarket Street?

[quote][p][bold]King Joke[/bold] wrote:
Private Eye, even if you could magic away all the traffic which ensures speeds on the ring road in the peak are a fraction of the 70 mph you laughably envisage, you forget that the coach services are only viable because they offer calling points close to residential and commercial areas in the centre and east of the city. Take away those and the coach would soon wither away to the hourly [or worse] services that less enlightened provincial towns 'enjoy'.
I wonder how many businesses would be so delighted to lose such a superb asset to the city - fast links from Heathrow, Gatwick and central London to within a short walk from their premises, on a very frequent basis. THe coaches run because people and businesses use them - not to annoy you.[/p][/quote]I do not understand your point, the train station is a four minute walk from the current terminus, that will not put people off (in fact when GG was closed and relocated to Oxpens coach park a few years ago it had no effect on services) And Thornhill P&R is ideal for people travelling to East, North and South Oxford, with local bus services linking to various parts of Oxford, and people can order a Taxi from the coach to pick them up if they so wish. The benefit to the City Centre would be massive with over 100 of the heaviest vehicles removed. And why would the coach soon wither away? are people going to start paying £100+ to get to the airport in a taxi, or will they say "sod it I'm going on holiday to Bognor instead of Barbados because the coach does not run past my house? Don't forget all of the doom death and disaster that would happen when the buses were thrown out of Cornmarket, with people like you saying it is too far to walk across town to get a connecting bus, well people have adapted to that, and they would to a new people friendly coach service. The Airport and London Coaches are now far too big and frequent to be allowed to continue through the city centre, even you must be able to see that, or do you still pine for the days of buses clogging up Cornmarket Street?The New Private Eye

- The station may be a four-minute walk from GG for the able bodied, but from some parts of the city centre it is 10-15 min, and for the less mobile it is prohibitive.
- Thornhill is not ideal at all for people in many of those areas - please list the direct buses from the Abingdon Rd, Cowley Rd, Woodstock Rd and Banbury Rd areas to Thornhill, and their frequencies.
- A PT system that relies on taxis to make it work for most people is one that has failed
- It would also be a failure to remove 100 buses (not sure where this figure comes from, is it per day?) and replacing them with 3,000 taxis. It would hardly reduce congestion.
- People will not decide not to fly if the airport bus doesn't serve the city centre, but they may decide to drive for more/all of the journey, also increasing overall vehicle movements and reducing the viablility of the coach service.
- The current routings pass many city centre business and Oxford Uni buildings, continuing past Brookes Uni and close to the JR Hospital, thereby providing an unparalleled level of service to most of the city's major employers (BMW excepted). Again, taking away this convenience reduces the viability of the service.
- Actually Cornmarket pedestrianisation has impacted on many journeys, with long walking connections now necessary on cross-city journeys, which is less convenient for the able-bodied and prohibitive for the less able.
- If the coaches are 'big' and 'frequent' it is because they are so popular, which in turn shows how much they are needed. A 'friendly' (ahem) service which didn't meet people's needs would not be a service for long.

To take your points in turn:
- The station may be a four-minute walk from GG for the able bodied, but from some parts of the city centre it is 10-15 min, and for the less mobile it is prohibitive.
- Thornhill is not ideal at all for people in many of those areas - please list the direct buses from the Abingdon Rd, Cowley Rd, Woodstock Rd and Banbury Rd areas to Thornhill, and their frequencies.
- A PT system that relies on taxis to make it work for most people is one that has failed
- It would also be a failure to remove 100 buses (not sure where this figure comes from, is it per day?) and replacing them with 3,000 taxis. It would hardly reduce congestion.
- People will not decide not to fly if the airport bus doesn't serve the city centre, but they may decide to drive for more/all of the journey, also increasing overall vehicle movements and reducing the viablility of the coach service.
- The current routings pass many city centre business and Oxford Uni buildings, continuing past Brookes Uni and close to the JR Hospital, thereby providing an unparalleled level of service to most of the city's major employers (BMW excepted). Again, taking away this convenience reduces the viability of the service.
- Actually Cornmarket pedestrianisation has impacted on many journeys, with long walking connections now necessary on cross-city journeys, which is less convenient for the able-bodied and prohibitive for the less able.
- If the coaches are 'big' and 'frequent' it is because they are so popular, which in turn shows how much they are needed. A 'friendly' (ahem) service which didn't meet people's needs would not be a service for long.King Joke

- The station may be a four-minute walk from GG for the able bodied, but from some parts of the city centre it is 10-15 min, and for the less mobile it is prohibitive.
- Thornhill is not ideal at all for people in many of those areas - please list the direct buses from the Abingdon Rd, Cowley Rd, Woodstock Rd and Banbury Rd areas to Thornhill, and their frequencies.
- A PT system that relies on taxis to make it work for most people is one that has failed
- It would also be a failure to remove 100 buses (not sure where this figure comes from, is it per day?) and replacing them with 3,000 taxis. It would hardly reduce congestion.
- People will not decide not to fly if the airport bus doesn't serve the city centre, but they may decide to drive for more/all of the journey, also increasing overall vehicle movements and reducing the viablility of the coach service.
- The current routings pass many city centre business and Oxford Uni buildings, continuing past Brookes Uni and close to the JR Hospital, thereby providing an unparalleled level of service to most of the city's major employers (BMW excepted). Again, taking away this convenience reduces the viability of the service.
- Actually Cornmarket pedestrianisation has impacted on many journeys, with long walking connections now necessary on cross-city journeys, which is less convenient for the able-bodied and prohibitive for the less able.
- If the coaches are 'big' and 'frequent' it is because they are so popular, which in turn shows how much they are needed. A 'friendly' (ahem) service which didn't meet people's needs would not be a service for long.

Why would there be 3,000 taxis in the city centre? The only people using Taxis would be for North Oxford and The East, the rest would get off at the train/bus station where there are connections to all of Oxford and Oxfordshire. Sorry KJ but you are wrong on this one, like you were wrong about the buses being moved from Cornmarket, (you did not address that point) the walk from Madgalen St East to The High Street bus stops is the same if not further. And what about the people that want to be at the train station area of Oxford, the current cramped bus station provides no access for them, and the taxi rank is 200 yards away which on a weds and thurs is a tour de force with luggage through the market.

[quote][p][bold]King Joke[/bold] wrote:
To take your points in turn:
- The station may be a four-minute walk from GG for the able bodied, but from some parts of the city centre it is 10-15 min, and for the less mobile it is prohibitive.
- Thornhill is not ideal at all for people in many of those areas - please list the direct buses from the Abingdon Rd, Cowley Rd, Woodstock Rd and Banbury Rd areas to Thornhill, and their frequencies.
- A PT system that relies on taxis to make it work for most people is one that has failed
- It would also be a failure to remove 100 buses (not sure where this figure comes from, is it per day?) and replacing them with 3,000 taxis. It would hardly reduce congestion.
- People will not decide not to fly if the airport bus doesn't serve the city centre, but they may decide to drive for more/all of the journey, also increasing overall vehicle movements and reducing the viablility of the coach service.
- The current routings pass many city centre business and Oxford Uni buildings, continuing past Brookes Uni and close to the JR Hospital, thereby providing an unparalleled level of service to most of the city's major employers (BMW excepted). Again, taking away this convenience reduces the viability of the service.
- Actually Cornmarket pedestrianisation has impacted on many journeys, with long walking connections now necessary on cross-city journeys, which is less convenient for the able-bodied and prohibitive for the less able.
- If the coaches are 'big' and 'frequent' it is because they are so popular, which in turn shows how much they are needed. A 'friendly' (ahem) service which didn't meet people's needs would not be a service for long.[/p][/quote]Why would there be 3,000 taxis in the city centre? The only people using Taxis would be for North Oxford and The East, the rest would get off at the train/bus station where there are connections to all of Oxford and Oxfordshire. Sorry KJ but you are wrong on this one, like you were wrong about the buses being moved from Cornmarket, (you did not address that point) the walk from Madgalen St East to The High Street bus stops is the same if not further. And what about the people that want to be at the train station area of Oxford, the current cramped bus station provides no access for them, and the taxi rank is 200 yards away which on a weds and thurs is a tour de force with luggage through the market.The New Private Eye

The walk from Magdalen St East to Gloucester Green, while not ideal, is nowhere near the walk to the High St bus stops. Were the coaches kicked out to the Station, users from North Oxford would find it very hard to use them.

The current arrangements work very well for most bus and coach users, and it would be a gigantic mistake to jeapordise the viability of the coach service by changing it so drastically.

Anyway I can 'address' Cornmarket. Buses were removed from Cornmarket, the main city pick up point for many routes at the same time that other measures to support bus users were put in place - mainly a priority route around the city centre. What exactly would you be able to offer users to mitigate poorer connections and a much longer journey?

The walk from Magdalen St East to Gloucester Green, while not ideal, is nowhere near the walk to the High St bus stops. Were the coaches kicked out to the Station, users from North Oxford would find it very hard to use them.
The current arrangements work very well for most bus and coach users, and it would be a gigantic mistake to jeapordise the viability of the coach service by changing it so drastically.
Anyway I can 'address' Cornmarket. Buses were removed from Cornmarket, the main city pick up point for many routes at the same time that other measures to support bus users were put in place - mainly a priority route around the city centre. What exactly would you be able to offer users to mitigate poorer connections and a much longer journey?King Joke

King Joke wrote:
I agree Patrick - the bus station shown will just about handle the current terminating services and could not possibly replace GG. You'd have to keep GG open, and hopefully tart it up a bit.

There is no need to move the long-distance coach services out of the city centre anyway, there is little need for interchange with rail services as they largely duplicate them. It's more important for them to interchange with local bus services, which they could not do as well at the station; the city centre offers many more interchange opportunities.

Hang on, not everyone actually lives in Oxford you know. If it makes connecting trains from around the county to buses heading to airports/areas more easily served by national coach services, then this should clearly be looked into.

This isn't just about Oxford, its about Oxfordshire as a whole and providing the best possible service for commuters in and around the county. Although whether this plan or indeed any other plan that will undoubtedly emerge in the future manage to succeed in this is however an entirely different question altogether...

[quote][p][bold]King Joke[/bold] wrote:
I agree Patrick - the bus station shown will just about handle the current terminating services and could not possibly replace GG. You'd have to keep GG open, and hopefully tart it up a bit.
There is no need to move the long-distance coach services out of the city centre anyway, there is little need for interchange with rail services as they largely duplicate them. It's more important for them to interchange with local bus services, which they could not do as well at the station; the city centre offers many more interchange opportunities.[/p][/quote]Hang on, not everyone actually lives in Oxford you know. If it makes connecting trains from around the county to buses heading to airports/areas more easily served by national coach services, then this should clearly be looked into.
This isn't just about Oxford, its about Oxfordshire as a whole and providing the best possible service for commuters in and around the county. Although whether this plan or indeed any other plan that will undoubtedly emerge in the future manage to succeed in this is however an entirely different question altogether...Manor Born

Connectivity with county bus services is important, that's true, but buses from around the County don't all serve the station, and neither will they all serve the station when the interchange is built as there will not be the space to accommodate them all.

For the business model, getting rid of many of the East Oxford/Headington customers who currently support the service, and hoping they'll be replaced by users from elsewhere in the County is a hell of a risk to take.

Transferring from trains is not an important flow, given that the coaches largely duplicate journeys possible by train anyway. Why would you get a train from Islip or Long Hanborough to Oxford to transfer to the Oxford Tube when you could get the train all the way to London?

Connectivity with county bus services is important, that's true, but buses from around the County don't all serve the station, and neither will they all serve the station when the interchange is built as there will not be the space to accommodate them all.
For the business model, getting rid of many of the East Oxford/Headington customers who currently support the service, and hoping they'll be replaced by users from elsewhere in the County is a hell of a risk to take.
Transferring from trains is not an important flow, given that the coaches largely duplicate journeys possible by train anyway. Why would you get a train from Islip or Long Hanborough to Oxford to transfer to the Oxford Tube when you could get the train all the way to London?King Joke